Learn more about our joint work with the Global Partnership on Drug Policies and Development (GPDPD)

The 5th Brandenburg Forum on Drugs and Development Policies took place from 11th to 13th February 2020, at the Schloss Lübbenau in Brandenburg, Germany. The Forum was organised within the framework of the Global Partnership on Drug Policies and Development (GPDPD).1 GPDPD is commissioned by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and implemented under political patronage of the German Federal Government’s Drug Commissioner. The meeting was co-hosted by the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH on behalf of BMZ, the Office of the German Federal Drug Commissioner, the Government of the Netherlands, the Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services, the Transnational Institute (TNI), and the International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC).

The Forum brought together 48 participants (25 male and 23 female), including government representatives from Albania, Belgium, Canada, Colombia, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Mexico, Myanmar, the Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom – alongside representatives from the European Union (EU) and African Union (AU), as well as the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). The meeting was also attended by several leading civil society and academic organisations, including representatives of people who use drugs.

In order to promote open dialogue, the discussions were conducted under ‘Chatham House Rule’ whereby the contents can be shared and used, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of any participants may be revealed.

5th Brandenburg Forum on Drugs and Development Policies report

Online discussions organised by the Steering Committee of the Eurasian Harm Reduction Association (EHRA) were held between 14 and 23 April 2020, with 51 members of the Association in seven sub-regional groups concerning the state of harm reduction programmes during the COVID-19 pandemic in 22 countries of the Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia (CEECA) region. The information and experiences shared among by members are summarised in this report.

In most countries of the CEECA region, opioid substitution therapy (OST) and sterile needle/syringe programmes (NSP) – key components of an evidence-based and comprehensive harm reduction (HR) programme – continue to operate under COVID-19 quarantine measures. Such work requires flexibility, readiness for mutual partnerships and strong advocacy by community and harm reduction activists. Unfortunately, the practice of amnesty of prisoners for drug-related crimes because of COVID-19 quarantine requirements has not been implemented in the region.

Harm reduction programmes during the COVID-19 crisis in Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Harm Reduction International and the International Network of People who Use Drugs (INPUD) urge international donors, philanthropic organisations and national governments to safeguard funding for harm reduction during COVID-19.

In advance of the Global Fund Board Meeting on 14 and 15 May 2020, HRI and INPUD commend the Global Fund Board and Secretariat for their leadership and proactive steps to support national responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, and urge them ensure that COVID-19 emergency funding is directed to, and serves the most vulnerable people in our society, including people who use drugs.

This means harm reduction services must be recognised as essential services during COVID-19. Funds must be provided to ensure services can adapt to lockdown and physical distancing measures, including ensuring harm reduction service providers, outreach workers and clients have personal protective equipment.

This also means prioritising community leadership. Communities have demonstrated their unique ability to react quickly to reach those who are otherwise unreachable during the pandemic, and have effectively eased some of the burden on the broader healthcare system.

Safeguarding funding for harm reduction during COVID-19

This guide provides practical guidance on how to design, implement and monitor programmes aimed at removing human rights-barriers to HIV services.

It will help implementers of such programmes to:

Funded by GIZ BACKUP Health, the guide was developed with the help of governments, donors and civil-society organisations, and in close collaboration with The Global Fund.

 Implementing and scaling up programmes to remove human rights-related barriers to HIV services

The criminalisation of people who use drugs compounds drug-related challenges and worsens health and welfare outcomes. Across the world, there is a growing number of jurisdictions where the possession of scheduled drugs for personal use has been decriminalised. In some countries and federal states, this has been extended to the cultivation of cannabis for personal use or the sharing of substances where there is no financial gain (also known as ‘social sharing’).

In the context of drug policy, ‘decriminalisation’ refers to the removal of criminal penalties for activities related to drug use. In some legal systems criminal penalties are replaced by civil sanctions, while in other systems no penalties are applied – please see our glossary for more detailed definitions.

Some form of decriminalisation has been adopted in 30 countries – with significant differences and levels of effectiveness. This interactive map provides an overview of these models, offering insights into decriminalisation laws, their implementation and impact.

The inclusion of a jurisdiction in the map is not an endorsement. For example, countries like Mexico and Russia are highlighted below, despite the fact both countries have ineffectual frameworks as detailed in their country profiles. The gold standard of decriminalisation is the removal of all punishment for drug use, and the availability and accessibility of evidence- and human rights-based harm reduction, health and social services on a voluntary basis.

This map has been developed in partnership with Release, the International Drug Policy Consortium and Accountability International, thanks to the financial support of the Robert Carr Fund and Open Society Foundations. This map will be updated regularly – if you do have any comments or feedback please contact us.

Drug decriminalisation across the world

By Prison Reform International (PRI) and the Thailand Institute of Justice (TIJ)

This year, PRI’s flagship publication Global Prison Trends, published alongside the Thailand Institute of Justice, has been released at a crucial time as prisons worldwide are being pushed to breaking point by the COVID-19 pandemic. Global Prison Trends 2020 documents the chronic issues that have led to this human rights and public health crisis and the challenges facing criminal justice systems in responding to the global pandemic.

To mark the launch of Global Prison Trends 2020 international criminal justice practitioners and human rights leaders, including United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights, Ilze Brands Kehris and the President of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Joel Hernández García attended an online webinar launch to discuss the report and PRI’s recommendation that governments urgently reduce their prison populations and begin a long-term shift towards alternatives to detention.

The report documents a record 11 million people in prison worldwide, with over 124 prisons exceeding their maximum occupancy rate. Global Prison Trends shows how this increase in numbers is driven by a punitive approach to criminal justice where more costly prison sentences are favoured over non-custodial alternatives.

The overcrowding and underfunding of prisons, alongside the overuse of imprisonment, has resulted in poor health services and sanitary conditions for prisoners that make people in prison and prison staff acutely vulnerable to COVID-19.

The special focus of Global Prison Trends 2020 identifies the solution presented by increasing the use of alternatives to imprisonment and the challenges governments may face in implementing this. PRI advocates for an increase in the use of alternatives to detention as a solution to the global prison crisis and in the long-term to reduce reoffending rates, better protect human rights and tackle overcrowding.

Global Prison Trends 2020 explores the following subjects:

Trends in the use of imprisonment, including the funding of penitentiary systems

Prison populations such as women, children, older persons and minority groups

Prison management including the provision of health services

A special focus on alternatives to imprisonment

Global Prison Trends 2020

By Nazlee Maghsoudi & Jeanette Bowles & Dan Werb

The increasing incidence of fatal opioid overdose is a public health crisis in Canada. While buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone are the standard first-line of opioid substitution options, limitations, including difficulty achieving long-term retention for some people who use opioids, are well known. For this group, injectable diacetylmorphine or hydromorphone can achieve positive outcomes, including high retention rates, reduced use of unregulated opioids, and reduced criminal activity. In May 2019, Health Canada announced changes to increase the accessibility of diacetylmorphine and hydromorphone, and in September 2019, the CIHR-funded Canadian Research Initiative in Substance Misuse released a national clinical guideline for diacetylmorphine and hydromorphone as additional frontline substitution options. While these developments present opportunities for scale-up, significant financial, structural, and practice barriers continue to impede access. This commentary explores the current state of policy and practice for diacetylmorphine and hydromorphone as opioid substitution options in Canada, outlines the rationale for rapid expansion of access, and highlights clinical and policy changes that must be undertaken or the death toll will continue to rise.

Expanding access to diacetylmorphine and hydromorphone for people who use opioids in Canada

: Josefina Alfonsín, Gerardo Contreras Ruvalcaba, Kenya Cuevas, Teresa García Castro, María Santos, Ari Vera Morales

Across the world, trans women have been subjected to discrimination, criminalization, and institutional violence. They often face social exclusion, violations of their human rights, and transphobia. In many cases, these factors lead to them working in highly criminalized informal economies, such as the drug trade, sex work, or sex for survival. As a result, police profile them as being dangerous, making them more vulnerable to police abuse and to being incarcerated. While data is sorely lacking, our research indicates that trans women are overrepresented in prison as compared to other groups, and they are much more likely to suffer abuse and violence behind bars than other populations. In addition to the challenges that incarceration imposes on any person deprived of liberty, trans women face particular challenges with regard to housing, their identification, body searches, access to medical services, privacy, and conjugal visits, among other issues. Despite this situation, trans women who have been deprived of liberty have demonstrated their capacity for agency and created organizations to defend their rights. In countries such as Argentina, Mexico, and Uruguay, groups of trans women are building a social movement based on different types of resistance and the development of political agendas.

Meanwhile, the absence of standards and public policies to protect the rights of trans women deprived of liberty is widespread in Latin American countries. The lack of disaggregated data, efforts to monitor this population’s situation of vulnerability, and related studies have deepened ignorance about these realities and hindered public policy design. Given the dearth of information on this issue, this report explores the framework of rights protection for trans women deprived of liberty, the statistical data available, structural inequalities existing prior to detention, living conditions in contexts of confinement, post-release social reintegration, trans women’s experiences of agency, along with good practices in the region. Furthermore, the report provides public policy recommendations to guarantee the full exercise of this population’s dignity and protection of its human rights.

: Almas Cautivas A.C, Casa Hogar Paola Buenrostro, Casa de las Muñecas Tiresias A.C., Dejusticia, Equis Justicia para las Mujeres, International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC), Procuración Penitenciaria de la Nación de Argentina, Red Corpora en Libertad, Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA)

Trans women deprived of liberty: Invisible stories behind bars

This guide is aimed at those who work with and advocate for women who use drugs in all their diversity. It equips them with practical, evidence-based interventions which will help advance the sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) of women who use drugs. It is based on the experiences of Frontline AIDS partners and others in implementing community-led harm reduction programmes in Kenya, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Tanzania, Uganda and Ukraine from 2011 to 2020 through the Community Action on Harm Reduction (CAHR), PITCH, and Integrated Harm Reduction programmes, and others. It is informed by the recommendations of the Guttmacher-Lancet Commission on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights 2018 report. The guide was developed in consultation with communities of women who inject drugs in select countries, and technical input was provided by the Women and Harm Reduction (WHRIN) Advisory Group.

Part 1 describes the current context for women who use drugs in relation to their SRHR. This part includes considerations of available data; the intersection of drug use with gender inequality, gender norms and stereotypes that create additional barriers to services for women who use drugs; and gender-based violence. It introduces the Guttmacher-Lancet Commission on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights’ 2018 definition of SRHR, and the essential service package, alongside the World Health Organization’s package for comprehensive harm reduction services.

Part 2 elaborates seven essential SRHR interventions for women who use drugs, and an additional sub-section on the sexual health and well-being of women who use drugs. Short case studies from Frontline AIDS and partners’ harm reduction programmes, as well as other NGOs, provide examples of successful interventions. In conclusion, we draw on priority recommendations from the Guttmacher-Lancet Commission for achieving SRHR that are most relevant to the context of women who use drugs.

Advancing the sexual and reproductive health and rights of women who use drugs

The criminalization of people who use psychoactive substances in the Central and Eastern Europe, and Central Asia (CEECA) region, instead of maintenance of public health and safety, increases the financial and social burden on the states. For people who inject drugs, approximately 58% will experience incarceration in their life.

Incarceration costs 2 to 6 times more than treatment from health and social service groups. However, in almost all the countries in the CEECA region, due to de facto criminalization of people who use psychoactive substances, harm reduction and other health services are severely underfunded and depend on international donors. Guidelines from the World Health Organization recommend that at least 40% of people who use opioids receive opioid substitution therapy (OST); however, most countries in the CEECA region barely reach 20%.

Governments should take evidence-based health and human rights approaches and reallocate money from policing, prosecuting, and incarceration of people who use psychoactive substances to community harm reduction and health services.

The guide contains 11 statements, followed by supporting arguments, which should be used in advocacy work. Arguments are prepared based on existing practices and evidence-based information. Arguments are created to advise on advocacy of reallocating funds from law enforcement budgets to health and harm reduction budgets for people who use psychoactive substances.

Criminalization costs in the CEECA region - A pocket guide

In 2019 EHRA together with Support, Research and Development Centre (SRDP), the Ukrainian Network of People who use Drugs (VOLNA), Drug-users Ukraine, the Drop-in Centre and the ENEY developed the methodology to access the client satisfaction with opioid maintenance therapy and conducted the pilot study in Kyiv and Kyiv Oblast region. Our approach to this study was based on the principles of equal partnership with the community of people who inject drugs and/or receive opioid maintenance therapy (OMT).

Almost from their very first days, OMT programmes in Ukraine have come under close scrutiny from the international research community. We believe that attention has been drawn to OMT programmes in Ukraine because of the low annual numbers of new patients throughout the period of the OMT implementation projects. According to UNAIDS, the estimated number of people who inject drugs in Ukraine is 346,000 individuals, of whom only 11,853 (or less than 3.5%) currently receive OMT services. The lack of attention paid to treatment satisfaction in Ukraine can probably be attributed to a shift in emphasis towards the needs of increasing service coverage, even while the quality of service is seldom included in ongoing discussions. Since OMT programmes have been operating in Ukraine for more than 10 years, the study of patient satisfaction with treatment offers opportunities for a better understanding of OMT service development prospects in the long run and of treatment trajectories and changing needs at the patient level.

As the design of this study was based on qualitative and quantitative methodological components, it was implemented in the framework of the mixed–method approach. The protocol and tools of this study were reviewed by the Ethics Review Board of the Ukrainian Institute on Public Health Policy.

The quality component of this study was implemented through semi-structured interviews with patients of OMT programmes.Within the scope of the study, the main purpose of semi-structured interviews was to highlight various aspects and criteria of satisfaction with OMT services among patients in order to develop a data-based questionnaire tool.

376 OMT patients took part in the pilot assessment, 178 structured interviews were conducted with patients who get OMT for free at state-funded OMT sites, 198 interviews were conducted with patients who buy OMT drugs in pharmacies after getting prescription at OMT sites based in private clinics. An overall satisfaction with OMT treatment is assessed as high and very high in 72% OMT patients, but the particular aspects of OMT treatment are not that highly assessed. The quality of medical care at OMT site is assessed as satisfied by 49%, 42% are satisfied with the physical environment at OMT sites and only 34 % of survey participants assess the psycho-social support as satisfied. At the same time, 89% of respondents mentioned that OMT is a vital need for them.

Based on the results of this study, we can draw the following conclusions and make some recommendations for further advocacy:

Studies like this conducted using a routine monitoring format as an integrated component of the monitoring and evaluation framework at OMT sites could help us understand the dynamics of satisfaction with treatment and treatment environment, interactions with OMT service providers and subjective treatment experiences. Which in turn could influence the long-term patient retention in OMT programmes.

For an improved understanding of the goals and outcomes of the treatment of chronic diseases like drug addiction, we recommend considering the assessment of patient quality of life as an indicator of treatment efficiency.

Survey of client satisfaction with OMT services among participants in Kyiv and the Kyiv Oblast region: A pilot study report

Venezuela’s state institutions have deteriorated and the country lacks an impartial, transparent, or even functional justice system. In this environment, armed groups and organized criminal structures, including drug trafficking groups, have thrived. But U.S government data suggests that, despite these challenges, Venezuela is not a primary transit country for U.S.-bound cocaine. U.S. policy toward Venezuela should be predicated on a realistic understanding of the transnational drug trade.

Recent data from the U.S. interagency Consolidated Counterdrug Database (CCDB) indicates that 210 metric tons of cocaine passed through Venezuela in 2018. By comparison, the State Department reports that over six times as much cocaine (1,400 metric tons) passed through Guatemala the same year.

According to U.S. monitoring data, the amount of cocaine trafficked from Colombia through Venezuela is significant, but it is a fraction of the cocaine that is sent through other transit countries. Around 90 percent of all U.S.-bound cocaine is trafficked through Western Caribbean and Eastern Pacific routes, not through Venezuela’s Eastern Caribbean seas.

There was an increase in cocaine flows through Venezuela in the period from 2012 to 2017, but that increase corresponds with a surge in cocaine production in Colombia during that same time. CCDB data suggests the amount of cocaine trafficked through Colombia rose from 918 metric tons in 2012 to 2,478 metric tons in 2017 (a 269 percent increase), and from 159 to 249 metric tons in Venezuela in that same period (a 156 percent increase). When cocaine trafficking in Colombia dropped slightly post-2017, cocaine flows in Venezuela fell as well.

U.S. CCDB data shows that cocaine flows through Venezuela have fallen since peaking in 2017. According to CCDB data, the amount of cocaine flowing through Venezuela fell 13 percent from 2017 to 2018, and appeared to continue to fall slightly through mid-2019.

A peaceful, negotiated, and orderly transition offers the best chance of allowing the reforms needed to address organized crime, drug trafficking, and corruption in Venezuela. The 2009 military coup d'etat and resulting turmoil in Honduras provides a cautionary tale for U.S. policymakers who see intervention or collapse as the best way route for a return to democracy in Venezuela.

Publications from IDPC Members